Good on those who attended and reported upon the AGM...thanks.
One poster talked about [a question] regarding what the BCSC found to be a problem [with the report] and that Franks response indicated the 'potential' (the 90m part).
If this is the major hold up then it would be seemingly simple (and quick) to 'remove' a section rather than re-write, expand or provide data for a section.
Therefore it is my assumtion, given the lengthy delay since the 22 march, that the 'potential' will not be removed, rather it is being adjusted or justified.
So, Im still looking for a larger number than originally reported, and with a statement on potential.